In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the

subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 27 )
Title of Presentation: Sentimental Analysis using Machine Learning

Presenter Number and Name: 1218575 Bhavin Virani

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

Points Points
What do you think were the 2 1.5 Lack of clarity in objective.
weaknesses of this proposal?
What do you think were the 2 2 Demonstrating the relevance of the
strengths of this research research to a specific field, problem.
proposal?
How would you suggest this 2 1.5 Mention objective in more detail.
proposal be improved?
Does the presenter explain the 5 4 Research questions should be more
objectives and research concise, well-defined, and directly
questions of this area of related to the objectives.
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total 11 9
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group27 )
Title of Presentation: Sentimental Analysis using Machine Learning

Presenter Number and Name: 1218571 Harsh Shah

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

Points Points
What do you think were the 2 1.5 Lack of clarity in objective.
weaknesses of this proposal?
What do you think were the 2 2 Demonstrating the relevance of the
strengths of this research research to a specific field, problem.
proposal?
How would you suggest this 2 1.5 Mention objective in more detail.
proposal be improved?
Does the presenter explain the 5 4 Research questions should be more
objectives and research concise, well-defined, and directly
questions of this area of related to the objectives.
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total 11 9
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 38)
Title of Presentation: Housing Price Prediction via Improved Machine Learning Techniques

Presenter Number and Name: 1209667 Pragati Prajapati

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

Points Points
What do you think were the 2 2 None
weaknesses of this proposal?
What do you think were the 2 2 Improved machine learning techniques
strengths of this research can lead to more precise and reliable
proposal? predictions, ultimately benefiting
various stakeholders in the real estate
industry.
How would you suggest this 2 2 They can use Feature engineering is
proposal be improved? the process of selecting, creating, or
transforming features that are relevant
for predicting housing prices.
Does the presenter explain the 5 4.5 The initial proposal mentioned in the
objectives and research earlier conversation provides clear
questions of this area of objectives.
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total 11 10.5
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 38)
Title of Presentation: Housing Price Prediction via Improved Machine Learning Techniques

Presenter Number and Name: 1222356 Malika Bhagora

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

Points Points
What do you think were the 2 2 None
weaknesses of this proposal?
What do you think were the 2 2 Improved machine learning techniques
strengths of this research can lead to more precise and reliable
proposal? predictions, ultimately benefiting
various stakeholders in the real estate
industry.
How would you suggest this 2 2 They can use Feature engineering is
proposal be improved? the process of selecting, creating, or
transforming features that are relevant
for predicting housing prices.
Does the presenter explain the 5 4.5 The initial proposal mentioned in the
objectives and research earlier conversation provides clear
questions of this area of objectives.
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total 11 10.5
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 2)
Title of Presentation: Football Goal Prediction Analysis using Machine Learning

Presenter Number and Name: 1213509 Tanmay Hatkar

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

Points Points
What do you think were the 2 2 Depending on the application and the
weaknesses of this proposal? use of predictions (e.g., for betting),
there may be regulatory and legal
considerations that need to be
addressed.
What do you think were the 2 2 Clear and well-defined research
strengths of this research objectives.
proposal?
How would you suggest this 2 1 The quality and quantity of data can
proposal be improved? significantly impact the accuracy of
predictions.
Does the presenter explain the 5 4 The objective and research questions
objectives and research are well planned and discussed.
questions of this area of
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total 11 9
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 2)
Title of Presentation: Football Goal Prediction Analysis using Machine Learning

Presenter Number and Name: 1214416 Yash Kudalkar

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

Points Points
What do you think were the 2 2 Depending on the application and the
weaknesses of this proposal? use of predictions (e.g., for betting),
there may be regulatory and legal
considerations that need to be
addressed.
What do you think were the 2 2 Clear and well-defined research
strengths of this research objectives.
proposal?
How would you suggest this 2 1 The quality and quantity of data can
proposal be improved? significantly impact the accuracy of
predictions.
Does the presenter explain the 5 4 The objective and research questions
objectives and research are well planned and discussed.
questions of this area of
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total 11 9
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 35)
Title of Presentation: Automatic Detection of Fraudulent Credit Card Transactions

Presenter Number and Name: 1223124 Sara Nazar

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

What do you think were the
weaknesses of this proposal?
What do you think were the
strengths of this research
proposal?
How would you suggest this
proposal be improved?
Does the presenter explain the
objectives and research
questions of this area of
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total
Points Points
2 1 Overly sensitive models may flag
legitimate transactions as fraudulent,
leading to customer inconvenience and
declined transactions.
2 2 Not any.
2 1 Models should be abale to adapt
changing fraud patterns and tactics
used by fraudsters.
5 5 Research questions should be more
concise, well-defined, and directly
related to the objectives
11 9
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 35)
Title of Presentation: Automatic Detection of Fraudulent Credit Card Transactions

Presenter Number and Name: 1212905 Darcus Angeline Peter

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

What do you think were the
weaknesses of this proposal?
What do you think were the
strengths of this research
proposal?
How would you suggest this
proposal be improved?
Does the presenter explain the
objectives and research
questions of this area of
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total
Points Points
2 1 Overly sensitive models may flag
legitimate transactions as fraudulent,
leading to customer inconvenience and
declined transactions.
2 2 Not any.
2 1 Models should be abale to adapt
changing fraud patterns and tactics
used by fraudsters.
5 5 Research questions should be more
concise, well-defined, and directly
related to the objectives
11 9
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 16)
Title of Presentation: Desigining Personalized Gameful Systems

Presenter Number and Name: 1208075 Stephonn Philips

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

Points Points
What do you think were the 2 2 Lack clarity regarding the specific
weaknesses of this proposal? objectives of the research.
What do you think were the 2 2 None.
strengths of this research
proposal?
How would you suggest this 2 1 They can focus on understanding the
proposal be improved? individual user's motivations,
preferences, and behaviors to create
tailored experiences.
Does the presenter explain the 5 4 The initial proposal mentioned in the
objectives and research earlier conversation provides clear
questions of this area of objectives.
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total 11 9
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 16)
Title of Presentation: Designing Personalized Gameful Systems

Presenter Number and Name: 1221643 Gurdeep Swain

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

Points Points
What do you think were the 2 2 Lack clarity regarding the specific
weaknesses of this proposal? objectives of the research.
What do you think were the 2 2 None.
strengths of this research
proposal?
How would you suggest this 2 1 They can focus on understanding the
proposal be improved? individual user's motivations,
preferences, and behaviors to create
tailored experiences.
Does the presenter explain the 5 4 The initial proposal mentioned in the
objectives and research earlier conversation provides clear
questions of this area of objectives.
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total 11 9
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 40)
Title of Presentation: Question Generator - NLP

Presenter Number and Name: 1224147 Tharun Reddy

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

What do you think were the
weaknesses of this proposal?
What do you think were the
strengths of this research
proposal?
How would you suggest this
proposal be improved?
Does the presenter explain the
objectives and research
questions of this area of
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total
Points Points
2 1.5 Ambiguity can arise from homonyms,
polysemy, metaphors, and other
linguistic nuances.
2 1.5 In educational technology, question
generators can help create quizzes and
tests.
2 2 Question generators can create
questions in different formats, including
yes/no questions, multiple-choice
questions, and open-ended questions.
5 5 The presentation was excellent, and the
statistics used to demonstrate the
current state of the study field were
extensive.
11 10
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 40)
Title of Presentation: Question Generator - NLP

Presenter Number and Name: 1224028 Vamsi Bhogaraju

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

What do you think were the
weaknesses of this proposal?
What do you think were the
strengths of this research
proposal?
How would you suggest this
proposal be improved?
Does the presenter explain the
objectives and research
questions of this area of
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total
Points Points
2 1.5 Ambiguity can arise from homonyms,
polysemy, metaphors, and other
linguistic nuances.
2 1.5 In educational technology, question
generators can help create quizzes and
tests.
2 2 Question generators can create
questions in different formats, including
yes/no questions, multiple-choice
questions, and open-ended questions.
5 5 The presentation was excellent, and the
statistics used to demonstrate the
current state of the study field were
extensive.
11 10
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 42)
Title of Presentation: Coccidiosis detection in chickens

Presenter Number and Name: 1225840 Amandeep Singh

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

What do you think were the
weaknesses of this proposal?
What do you think were the
strengths of this research
proposal?
How would you suggest this
proposal be improved?
Does the presenter explain the
objectives and research
questions of this area of
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total
Points Points
2 2 Coccidiosis can present with a wide
range of symptoms, and these
symptoms can overlap with those of
other poultry diseases.
2 2 None.
2 2 Serological tests, such as enzyme-
linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA),
can detect antibodies produced by
chickens in response to coccidia
infections.
5 4 The objective and research questions
are well planned and discussed.
11 10
In the proposal, every research question should be well-motivated and answered relative to the
subsequently-described methods to be employed in the research.

Presenter Evaluation Form

COMP 5112, Research Methodology in Computer Science
Research proposal: First Presentation (Group 42)
Title of Presentation: Coccidiosis detection in chickens

Presenter Number and Name: 1229429 Harsh Soni

Participant Number and Name: 1190070 Raj Patel

This evaluation form is planned to offer speakers with productive feedback that will advance
the speaker future research proposal.

Criteria Max Given Justification

What do you think were the
weaknesses of this proposal?
What do you think were the
strengths of this research
proposal?
How would you suggest this
proposal be improved?
Does the presenter explain the
objectives and research
questions of this area of
research clearly? Was their any
originality (i.e. work planned to
be accomplished which has not
been done previously).
Total
Points Points
2 2 Coccidiosis can present with a wide
range of symptoms, and these
symptoms can overlap with those of
other poultry diseases.
2 2 None.
2 2 Serological tests, such as enzyme-
linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA),
can detect antibodies produced by
chickens in response to coccidia
infections.
5 4 The objective and research questions
are well planned and discussed.
11 10